Characterizing parameter sensitivity and uncertainty for a snow model across hydroclimatic regimes

Advances in Water Resources

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 114-127

  He, Minxue ^a,f,g   Hogue, Terri S ^a   Franz, Kristie J ^b   Margulis, Steven A ^a   Vrugt, Jasper A ^c,d,e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c CENTER FOR NONLINEAR STUDIES   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^e University of California at Irvine   (United States)

^f NOAA EARTH SYSTEM RESEARCH LABORATORY   (United States)

^g RIVERSIDE TECHNOLOGY INC   (United States)

Author keywords

Differential Evolution Adaptive Metropolis; Generalized Sensitivity Analysis; National Weather Service; SNOW17; Snowmelt; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

DIFFERENTIAL EVOLUTION; GENERALIZED SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICES; SNOW17; SNOWMELT; UNCERTAINTY;

DATA PROCESSING; EVOLUTIONARY ALGORITHMS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SNOW; SNOW MELTING SYSTEMS; WEATHER FORECASTING; WEATHER INFORMATION SERVICES;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

ALGORITHM; DATA ASSIMILATION; ENSEMBLE FORECASTING; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; HYDROMETEOROLOGY; METEOROLOGY; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SNOW WATER EQUIVALENT; SNOWMELT; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; WEATHER FORECASTING;

EID: 78650170040     PISSN: 03091708     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2010.10.002     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Ajami N.K., Duan Q., Sorooshian S. An integrated hydrologic Bayesian multimodel combination framework: confronting input, parameter, and model structural uncertainty in hydrologic prediction. Water Resour Res 2007, 43:W01403.
2. Anderson E.A. Calibration of conceptual models for use in river forecasting 2002, National Weather Service, Hydrology Lab., Silver Spring, MD.
3. Anderson EA. National weather service river forecast system - snow accumulation and ablation model. Tech. memo NWS HYDRO-17. Silver Springs, Md.: National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration; 1973. p. 2491.
4. Beck M.B. Water quality modeling: a review of the analysis of uncertainty. Water Resour Res 1987, 23:1393.
5. Beven K., Binley A. Future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hydrol Process 1992, 6:279.
6. Blasone R.S., Vrugt J.A., Madsen H., Rosbjerg D., Robinson B.A., Zyvoloski G.A. Generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) using adaptive Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling. Adv Water Resour 2008, 31:630.
7. Christiaens K., Feyen J. Use of sensitivity and uncertainty measures in distributed hydrological modeling with an application to the MIKE SHE model. Water Resour Res 2002, 38:1169.
8. Crook A.G. SNOTEL: monitoring climatic factors to predict water supplies. J Soil Water Conserv 1977, 32.
9. Day G.N. Extended streamflow forecasting using NWSRFS. J Water Res Pl-ASCE 1985, 111:157.
10. Doesken NJ, Schaefer GL. The contribution of SNOTEL precipitation measurements to climate analysis, monitoring and research. In: Western snow conference, Vancouver, B.C., Canada; 1987. p. 14.
11. Duan Q., Sorooshian S., Gupta V. Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models. Water Resour Res 1992, 28:1015.
12. Fassnacht S.R., Dressler K.A., Bales R.C. Snow water equivalent interpolation for the Colorado River basin from snow telemetry (SNOTEL) data. Water Resour Res 2003, 39:1208.
13. Franz K.J. Characterization of the comparative skill of conceptual and physically-based snow models for streamflow prediction 2006, University of California, Irvine, p. 223.
14. Franz K.J., Hartmann H.C., Sorooshian S., Bales R. Verification of national weather service ensemble streamflow predictions for water supply forecasting in the Colorado River basin. J Hydrometeorol 2003, 4:1105.
15. Franz K.J., Hogue T.S., Sorooshian S. Operational snow modeling: addressing the challenges of an energy balance model for National Weather Service forecasts. J Hydrol 2008, 360:48.
16. Franz K.J., Hogue T.S., Sorooshian S. Snow model verification using ensemble prediction and operational benchmarks. J Hydrometeorol 2008, 9:1402.
17. Freer J., Beven K., Ambroise B. Bayesian estimation of uncertainty in runoff prediction and the value of data: an application of the GLUE approach. Water Resour Res 1996, 32:2161.
18. Garbrecht J.D. Comparison of three alternative ANN designs for monthly rainfall-runoff simulation. J Hydraul Eng ASCE 2006, 11:502.
19. Gelman A., Rubin D.B. Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences. Stat Sci 1992, 7:457.
20. Hamby D.M. A review of techniques for parameter sensitivity analysis of environmental models. Environ Monit Assess 1994, 32:135.
21. He M. Data assimilation in watershed models for improved hydrologic forecasting 2010, University of California, Los Angeles, p. 172.
22. Hogue T.S., Bastidas L.A., Gupta H.V., Sorooshian S. Evaluating model performance and parameter behavior for varying levels of land surface model complexity. Water Resour Res 2006, 42:W08430.
23. Hornberger G.M., Spear R.C. An approach to the preliminary analysis of environmental systems. J Environ Manage 1981, 12:7.
24. Kavetski D., Kuczera G., Franks S.W. Bayesian analysis of input uncertainty in hydrological modeling: 1. Theory. Water Resour Res 2006, 42:W03407.
25. Kitanidis P.K., Bras R.L. Real-time forecasting with a conceptual hydrologic model I. Analysis of uncertainty. Water Resour Res 1980, 16:1025.
26. Koren V., Reed S., Smith M., Zhang Z., Seo D.J. Hydrology laboratory research modeling system (HL-RMS) of the US National Weather Service. J Hydrol 2004, 291:297.
27. Kottegoda N.T., Rosso R. Statistics, probability, and reliability for civil and environmental engineers 1997, McGraw-Hill, New York.
28. Kuczera G., Parent E. Monte Carlo assessment of parameter uncertainty in conceptual catchment models: the Metropolis algorithm. J Hydrol 1998, 211:69.
29. Liu Y., Gupta H.V. Uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: toward an integrated data assimilation framework. Water Resour Res 2007, 43:W07401.
30. Madsen H. Automatic calibration of a conceptual rainfall-runoff model using multiple objectives. J Hydrol 2000, 235:276.
31. Margulis S.A., McLaughlin D., Entekhabi D., Dunne S. Land data assimilation and estimation of soil moisture using measurements from the Southern Great Plains 1997 field experiment. Water Resour Res 2002, 42:W01407.
32. McKay M.D. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis using a statistical sample of input values 1988, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla, pp. 145-86.
33. Montanari A. What do we mean by'uncertainty'? The need for a consistent wording about uncertainty assessment in hydrology. Hydrol Process 2007, 21:841.
34. Mote P.W. Trends in snow water equivalent in the Pacific Northwest and their climatic causes. Geophys Res Lett 2003, 30:1601.
35. Mote P.W., Hamlet A.F., Clark M.P., Lettenmaier D.P. Declining mountain snowpack in Western North America. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 2005, 86:39.
36. Muleta M.K., Nicklow J.W. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis coupled with automatic calibration for a distributed watershed model. J Hydrol 2005, 306:127.
37. Nash J.E., Sutcliffe J.V. River flow forecasting through conceptual models: Part I. A discussion of principles. J Hydrol 1970, 10:282.
38. NRCS. SNOTEL data collection system. Natural Resources Conservation Service; 1997.
39. NWS. National Weather Service River forecast system - user's manual. Silver Spring, MD.: Hydrology Lab, National Weather Service; 2004.
40. Reed S., Koren V., Smith M., Zhang Z., Moreda F., Seo D.-J., et al. Overall distributed model intercomparison project results. J Hydrol 2004, 298:27.
41. Seo D.J., Koren V., Cajina N. Real-time variational assimilation of hydrologic and hydrometeorological data into operational hydrologic forecasting. J Hydrometeorol 2003, 4:627.
42. Serreze M.C., Clark M.P., Armstrong R.L., McGinnis D.A., Pulwarty R.S. Characteristics of the western United States snowpack from snowpack telemetry (SNOTEL) data. Water Resour Res 1999, 35:2145.
43. Serreze M.C., Clark M.P., Frei A. Characteristics of large snowfall events in the montane western United States as examined using snowpack telemetry (SNOTEL) data. Water Resour Res 2001, 37:675.
44. Service R.F. As the west goes dry. Science 2004, 303:1124.
45. Shamir E., Carpenter T.M., Fickenscher P., Georgakakos K.P., Asce M. Evaluation of the National Weather Service operational hydrologic model and forecasts for the American River basin. J Hydrol Eng 2006, 11:392.
46. Shamir E., Georgakakos K.P. Distributed snow accumulation and ablation modeling in the American River basin. Adv Water Resour 2006, 29:558.
47. Shamir E., Georgakakos K.P. Estimating snow depletion curves for American River basins using distributed snow modeling. J Hydrol 2007, 334:162.
48. Sieber A., Uhlenbrook S. Sensitivity analyses of a distributed catchment model to verify the model structure. J Hydrol 2005, 310:216.
49. Singh P., Singh V.P. Snow and glacier hydrology 2001, Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands.
50. Slater A.G., Clark M.P. Snow data assimilation via an ensemble Kalman filter. J Hydrometeorol 2006, 7:478.
51. Smith M.B., Seo D.-J., Koren V.I., Reed S.M., Zhang Z., Duan Q., et al. The distributed model intercomparison project (DMIP): motivation and experiment design. J Hydrol 2004, 298:4.
52. Spear R.C., Grieb T.M., Shang N. Parameter uncertainty and interaction in complex environmental models. Water Resour Res 1994, 30:3159.
53. Spear R.C., Hornberger G.M. Eutrophication in peel inlet - II. Identification of critical uncertainties via generalized sensitivity analysis. Water Res 1980, 14:43.
54. Stewart I.T., Cayan D.R., Dettinger M.D. Changes in snowmelt runoff timing in Western North America under a 'business as usual' climate change scenario. Climatic Change 2004, 62:217.
55. Tang Y., Reed P., van Werkhoven K., Wagener T. Advancing the identification and evaluation of distributed rainfall-runoff models using global sensitivity analysis. Water Resour Res 2007, 43:W06415.
56. Tang Y., Reed P., Wagener T., Van Werkhoven K. Comparing sensitivity analysis methods to advance lumped watershed model identification and evaluation. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 2007, 11:793.
57. Thiemann M., Trosset M., Gupta H., Sorooshian S. Bayesian recursive parameter estimation for hydrologic models. Water Resour Res 2001, 37:2521.
58. van Werkhoven K., Wagener T., Reed P., Tang Y. Characterization of watershed model behavior across a hydroclimatic gradient. Water Resour Res 2008, 44:W01429.
59. Vrugt J.A., Bouten W., Gupta H.V., Sorooshian S. Toward improved identifiability of hydrologic model parameters: the information content of experimental data. Water Resour Res 2002, 38:1312.
60. Vrugt J.A., Gupta H.V., Bouten W., Sorooshian S. A shuffled complex evolution metropolis algorithm for optimization and uncertainty assessment of hydrological model parameters. Water Resour Res 2003, 39:1201.
61. Vrugt J.A., ter Braak C., Diks C.G.H., Roberts D.A., Hyman J.M., Higdon D. Accelerating Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation by differential evolution with self-adaptive randomized subspace sampling. Int J Nonlinear Sci Numer Simulat 2009, 10:273.
62. Vrugt J.A., ter Braak C., Gupta H., Robertson D. Equifinality of formal (DREAM) and informal (GLUE) Bayesian approaches in hydrologic modeling?. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 2008, 10.1007/s00477-008-0274-y.
63. Vrugt J.A., ter Braak C.J.F., Clark M.P., Hyman J.M., Robinson B.A. Treatment of input uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: doing hydrology backwards with Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation. Water Resour Res 2008, 44:W00B09.
64. Wagener T., Boyle D.P., Lees M.J., Wheater H.S., Gupta H.V., Sorooshian S. A framework for development and application of hydrological models. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 2001, 5:13.
65. Wagener T., Kollat J. Numerical and visual evaluation of hydrological and environmental models using the Monte Carlo analysis toolbox. Environ Modell Softw 2007, 22:1021.
66. Wagener T., McIntyre N., Lees M.J., Wheater H.S., Gupta H.V. Towards reduced uncertainty in conceptual rainfall-runoff modelling: dynamic identifiability analysis. Hydrol Process 2003, 17:455.
67. Washington W.M., Weatherly J.W., Meehl G.A., Semtner A.J., Bettge T.W., Craig A.P., et al. Parallel climate model (PCM) control and transient simulations. Clim Dynam 2000, 16:755.
68. Xiong L., O'Connor K.M. An empirical method to improve the prediction limits of the GLUE methodology in rainfall-runoff modeling. J Hydrol 2008, 349:115.
69. Zhang Y., Pinder G. Latin hypercube lattice sample selection strategy for correlated random hydraulic conductivity fields. Water Resour Res 2003, 39:1226.